Search This Blog

Monday, April 5, 2010

Like VCR’s, answering machines and Walkmans, true house hockey is much more a part of the past than it is the present.

Aside from a few places that have enough teams in each age group to be able to actually have a real "house" league, meaning in one arena, the majority of "B" level teams that are commonly referred to as "house" actually travel more often and further distances than some "travel" teams.You can count places that have real "house hockey" on one hand. In fact, there are even a few associations that do have enough teams at each age group to have a real in-house league that still choose to play in a travel league. House hockey, in some places, is very much passé.

And that is too bad, because it is hurting the future of the game. But not enough people understand that. Or worse yet, even care. And I get that. Most people are in the game for a short period of time. Their kids get started, they play, they grow up and they move on. Why worry about what happens after that? Not my concern. Why should it be? They are only concerned about the here and now. About what happens next. About what is best for my kid.

The Problem with thatBut here is the problem. As the house hockey classification continues to shrink and shrivel into obscurity, so do the opportunities for players to get started playing the game. And just as importantly, so do the places to continue to play the game that are affordable, conveniently located and require a reasonable time commitment for families. You know, like recreational sports used to be before we adults started to place more importance on building all-star teams and travelling great distances to conquer the teams of children from far away places.

Hockey is a sport like no other. It is a wonderful combination of speed, skill, agility, grace, intelligence and physicality. You almost have to try to be bored when you play it. It’s that much fun. People love it when they try it.

Yet over the years we have allowed the entry level of the game to erode to the point where it barely even exists any more. So less people find it a realistic, affordable and convenient option for their kids to play. Too much travel, too much time and too much money. There is a reason why girls hockey has never gotten much traction in this state compared to other places. There is literally no entry level to the game for girls. No house hockey.

Time for a new systemSome of us will do just about anything to have our kids play the game. And even more for them to play it at a "higher level" than "just house hockey". Unfortunately, the structure that has been created here in Michigan as a result of that has all but cast aside what once was the very essence of the game, house hockey.

So now it’s time to kick it aside completely. At least as it relates to how it is governed by the Michigan Amateur Hockey Association (MAHA).

De-regulate it and let the rinks and associations run it how they choose to. Let them be in charge of recreational hockey and govern how it operates within the walls of their facilities. Let them determine their own fate. Our current system is more destructive to the game than it is beneficial. We are losing ground faster than the Detroit Lions offense.

Currently we essentially have three distinct levels of play in Michigan. Tier I or AAA teams are supposed to be the highest level with teams having no restrictions on where their players can come from. Tier II or A/AA teams are the next step down and are required to be formed from players predominantly within the district with only three allowed from outside. The problem is that, comparatively speaking, a couple of districts are more like Singapore with a significant hockey playing population in a small area, while others are more like Canada with a large, sparsely populated area. Not exactly an equitable distribution of talent when it comes to forming teams.

The third level is House or "B" with teams formed by a draft, which is supposed to create parity and be fair for all. You know, sort of the recreational level. In theory, and at one time, that might have been true. But not any more. Additionally, most people don’t know that there is also a C level of play that is truly recreational and confines teams to play within their own rink. I think that is a great idea. We just need more of it.

Not formed the same wayThe problem is that "B", or what once was "house hockey", has become way more than that. And the system is incredibly unfair and essentially rewards coaches and organizations and arenas that choose to operate on the edge of the intended spirit of the rules.

Here is how it works. Some arenas that have strong organizations and in-house programs actually have 6 or 8 or even 10 or 12 teams within an age group. There are not very many of these around though. At the "B" or house level, these teams are required to have a set of draft rules to equitably divide up the talent. Which if you really think about it, they probably would want to do anyway, even if they were not required to, particularly if most of their competition was amongst themselves.

Then there are organizations that only have one "B" or house level team. Amazingly (sarcasm intended) these teams are typically quite strong. What is really amazing is that the only kids who sign up to form that one team somehow know each other and are often quite strong, experienced players. It really is incredible how the less experienced players never seem to end up on these teams. Yet every team in the larger associations, as they should, have some of these players.Imagine what happens during the state tournament or other times that these teams compete with each other. Under the current structure, they are all labeled B hockey teams. Yet they are definitely not formed the same way.

Inherently unfairIn the current economic climate it gets worse. Some arenas, desperate for teams because they are either unwilling or unable to do the work to get players started in their own facility, offer incredible incentives for coaches from other facilities to bring players to their place. ‘Sure, we will only have one B team and sure you can all play together.’ Get the picture? Rules have attempted to address the problem, but with little or no success. If you want to have a recruited B team you can have one and be very successful.

The "B" or house system is inherently unfair. So let’s get rid of it. At the "travel" level we have already created a system of "competitive stratification" with multiple levels of play. In the LCAHL this past year there were three different "divisions" or levels of play at each age group. These levels are critical when it comes to tryout time. The top players flock to the top teams and the lower level teams get the leftovers. Oddly enough these teams all compete against each other in the state tournament. The results are often quite predictable. And ugly. And unfair.

The solution is simple. The system is already in place. Let’s just legitimize it. De-regulate house hockey. Let the arenas and associations run their own in-house programs as they see fit and to provide an affordable, convenient and reasonable option for families. And have multiple levels of "travel hockey" for those who want to want to form their own teams.